Shabbir cops 12 months

[open365]

Let's hope so. I was more reacting to the inference that the 12-month thing is a 'ban' and a 'punishment' rather than a period of time in which he works on fixing his action. It, to my mind, is very harsh calling it 'cheating' when he bowls the same way most deliveries (therefore making it a physical problem) as opposed to throwing the occasional delivery in order to gain an unfair advantage.
.

Is it proven he has a physical defect?

Why would him chuckling every ball make it not cheating? By my logic it's cheating more.

He may not be using it for extra pace,but he still chucks it for one reason or another,making it unfair to let him play international cricket.

As for the ban he's received,i can't really comment because im not sure of the circumstances. If he's been banned before,done remedial work and bowled properly then reverted back to chucking,then i can't really see why anyone has any complaints.

 

[social]

They can see if the general action is similar to that tested though can't they?

The "look" of the action is not what's important - it is the degree of flexion and that cannot reliably be identified from tapes made in match conditions.

 

[C_C]

cannot reliably be identified from tapes made in match conditions.

It all depends on the camera angles available, kind of filter programs you have and sleeved/sleeveless shirts, etc.
If the abovementioned conditions are met, the determination from tapes would be quite accurate and authentic ( within a couple of degrees of accuracy).

 

[Top_Cat]

Is it proven he has a physical defect?

Don't know. He must do because he's been through the process before and he still bowls with a bent arm.

Why would him chuckling every ball make it not cheating? By my logic it's cheating more.

Depends on whether you consider merely breaking the rules to be cheating. I don't. For mine there has to be malicious intent and I find it extraordinarily difficult to believe that a guy who has been through the process would continue to chuck every ball thinking that he wouldn't get pulled up again. The fact he has and does suggests stronger evidence for something he can't help than him maliciously chucking every ball thinking that it won't get noticed or that he won't get in trouble. Unless he's into self-sabotage.........

I think we all need to re-examine exactly what the chucking legislation is designed to prevent. For me, because most can throw a ball faster than they can bowl it, it's designed to prevent injury and people who are ordinarily not very quick from throwing lethal-speed deliveries. Shabbir, from what I've seen of him now and in his early career, bowls at largely the same pace whether his action is doubtful or not. It's not as if he's a medium-pacer running around injuring batsmen with vicously pinged faster balls. A lot of the evidence points towards him being a guy who has a physical problem he has difficulty correcting. Now, whether it really is not-fixable or whether he's been lazy with his rehabilitation in strengthening the muscles around his albow which would prevent him from chucking I don't know but it really does defy logic to suggest he's a deliberate pinger who thought he wouldn't be caught doing his dirty deeds because if tehre's one guy who's been the subject of more scrutiny that Murali since his career began, it's Shabbir.

I dunno, I just figure a guy like Shabbir needs continuous monitoring and remedial work, not punishment.

As for the ban he's received,i can't really comment because im not sure of the circumstances. If he's been banned before,done remedial work and bowled properly then reverted back to chucking,then i can't really see why anyone has any complaints.

As long as he's not just left on his own and forgotten about then yes, I have no problem with him not playing until his action passes scrutiny. But then, for that reason, he shouldn't be playing any cricket (not just international cricket) until this happens. I just hope he receives the support he needs, like Lee, Shoaib and Murali before him but I don't hold out much hope.

 

[Autobahn]

Don't know. He must do because he's been through the process before and he still bowls with a bent arm.



Depends on whether you consider merely breaking the rules to be cheating. I don't. For mine there has to be malicious intent and I find it extraordinarily difficult to believe that a guy who has been through the process would continue to chuck every ball thinking that he wouldn't get pulled up again. The fact he has and does suggests stronger evidence for something he can't help than him maliciously chucking every ball thinking that it won't get noticed or that he won't get in trouble. Unless he's into self-sabotage.........

I think we all need to re-examine exactly what the chucking legislation is designed to prevent. For me, because most can throw a ball faster than they can bowl it, it's designed to prevent injury and people who are ordinarily not very quick from throwing lethal-speed deliveries. Shabbir, from what I've seen of him now and in his early career, bowls at largely the same pace whether his action is doubtful or not. It's not as if he's a medium-pacer running around injuring batsmen with vicously pinged faster balls. A lot of the evidence points towards him being a guy who has a physical problem he has difficulty correcting. Now, whether it really is not-fixable or whether he's been lazy with his rehabilitation in strengthening the muscles around his albow which would prevent him from chucking I don't know but it really does defy logic to suggest he's a deliberate pinger who thought he wouldn't be caught doing his dirty deeds because if tehre's one guy who's been the subject of more scrutiny that Murali since his career began, it's Shabbir.

I dunno, I just figure a guy like Shabbir needs continuous monitoring and remedial work, not punishment.



As long as he's not just left on his own and forgotten about then yes, I have no problem with him not playing until his action passes scrutiny. But then, for that reason, he shouldn't be playing any cricket (not just international cricket) until this happens. I just hope he receives the support he needs, like Lee, Shoaib and Murali before him but I don't hold out much hope.

Regardless if he is a constant medium-pacer who's completely innocent, if he still bowls with a illegal action he gets punished.

He has been very lucky because instead of being no-balled out of the game like what has happened to many bowlers, he has been given many chances to correct his action and has been given a big period to attempt to correct his action again.

 

[Top_Cat]

He has been very lucky because instead of being no-balled out of the game like what has happened to many bowlers, he has been given many chances to correct his action and has been given a big period to attempt to correct his action again.

So because of stupidly disproportionate and ill-informed punishment in the past, he should consider himself lucky now? That's like saying Van Nguyen should be lucky Singapore hanged him because they used to shoot people.

Again, I'm not advocating he still be playing. Not even close. I'm advocating he be stopped from playing and working with him with a view towards getting his action up to scratch to be playing again. He needs help, not to be ostracised as a 'chucker'. The present legislation is supposedly to prevent exactly that. We shall see.

 

[Autobahn]

So because of stupidly disproportionate and ill-informed punishment in the past, he should consider himself lucky now? That's like saying Van Nguyen should be lucky Singapore hanged him because they used to shoot people.

Yes he should be lucky because unlike many people before him he has been offered a way back into cricket and the ban is only temporary.

Again, I'm not advocating he still be playing. Not even close. I'm advocating he be stopped from playing and working with him with a view towards getting his action up to scratch to be playing again. He needs help, not to be ostracised as a 'chucker'. The present legislation is supposedly to prevent exactly that. We shall see.

And that's what is happening, i mean how do you think he is going to spend the next year? A walking tour of slough? Building a new shed? No of course not, he's going to spend every waking moment improving his action again and again. It's a punishment yes but more importantly it's a wake-up call.

 

[Mecnun]

I do not think he will play cricket again. It's obvious his rehabilitation did not work and if he has not been able to fix it by now it will be even harder to do it now. I feel a little sorry for him though because I do not believe he does it deliberately or maliciously with the intent of cheating.

 

[social]

It all depends on the camera angles available, kind of filter programs you have and sleeved/sleeveless shirts, etc.
If the abovementioned conditions are met, the determination from tapes would be quite accurate and authentic ( within a couple of degrees of accuracy).

All of these things are possible but until there is consistency it will never be accepted.

 

[Jono]

What if (extreme hypothetical here) Shabbir Ahmed perfected his action making it absolutely orthodox. McGrath and Pollockesque. Yet he does this after only 6 months of remedial work. Why should he not be allowed back into international cricket? Why should he not be able to play the other 6 months? He's basically being punished, when he's not necessarily 'cheating'. Rather he's unintentionally breaking the rules due to his incapability/laziness whatever you want to call it. Hence he shouldn't be allowed to play cricket until his action is fine, whether that be 12 months, 24 months, 36 months or 2 months. Why the set 12 month ban?

I think that is similar to TC's point. There shouldn't be a time period to which he is not allowed to play international cricket. Rather I think he should not be allowed till he's fixed his actions up in the labs, and is then made to play some form of cricket (not int'l) and if his action still deterioates (I'm not sure if they can get TV/Camera footage of him in club or domestic cricket?) then make him do remedial work again.

That being said, I don't think he's in Pakistan's best XI anyway. Its not really entirely relevant, but whilst he's shown spurts of being a good bowler, I don't find him consistent enough.

 

[Tony Blade]

Shabbir was obviously a chucker, but TC is right...it didnt seem like he got anything extra with a bent elbow. Either way, he shouldnt play again until there is absolutely no doubt over his action. Getting 'just under 15 degrees' might be acceptable in lab conditions but it deteriorates markedly during a match.

 

[Run like Inzy]

I think its kinda unfair after clearing him. I don't think it will make much difference to Pakistan as a team because the back up bowling (Arafat, Asif and Gul) are looking pretty good. However it will probably mean the end of his career as in a years time it maybe difficult to return to international cricket. His confidence will be dented and by then other bowlers will have filled his shoes (and he aint exactly 19) so Shabbir may have played his last game.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I don't think it's appropriate to accuse Shabbir of "cheating", as that clearly implies some malice on his part. However, the fact that he doesn't appear to gain much advantage by transgressing is neither here nor there as far as I can see. The mere fact that he does transgress means he makes himself a suitable candidate for punishment. 12 months may seem draconian, but he is (like it or not) a proven recidivist who can bowl within the accepted tolerance limits. That he does not (& repeatedly so) means he has left himself open to the ICC's prescribed sanction.

To suggest that he shouldn't be punished because he (seemingly) gains no advantage is almost akin to suggesting front-foot no-balls shouldn't be called if the ball doesn't result in a wicket. In an ideal world we would have the technology to be able to ascertain at the time of delivery if someone is "chucking"; it does not (to my knowledge) &, unfortunately, until it does we are left with this system.

Another thing to consider is (& I play devil's advocate here slightly) is how many chuckers have actually 'fessed up to their sin? Of the players called for it in tests, I think Tony Lock is the only one to admit to deliberately throwing his arm-ball. If Shabbir gains no advantage, knows the eyes of the (cricketing) world (biomechanics division) are on him & runs the risk of cooling his heels for 12 months, why do it at all?

 

[Top_Cat]

To suggest that he shouldn't be punished because he (seemingly) gains no advantage is almost akin to suggesting front-foot no-balls shouldn't be called if the ball doesn't result in a wicket. In an ideal world we would have the technology to be able to ascertain at the time of delivery if someone is "chucking"; it does not (to my knowledge) &, unfortunately, until it does we are left with this system.

Noone in this thread has said he shouldn't bear some consequences of his dubious action. You're missing the point. It's the blanket 12 month 'punishment' which is the problem.

And I also don't see how on one hand you can claim in your first paragraph there's probably no malice in what he's done and then use the word 'ricidivist', a word almost exclusively used colloquially in describing a criminal.

Another thing to consider is (& I play devil's advocate here slightly) is how many chuckers have actually 'fessed up to their sin? Of the players called for it in tests, I think Tony Lock is the only one to admit to deliberately throwing his arm-ball. If Shabbir gains no advantage, knows the eyes of the (cricketing) world (biomechanics division) are on him & runs the risk of cooling his heels for 12 months, why do it at all?

Exactly; why do it at all? Maybe he can't help it? Maybe the last couple of times he's had his action worked-on, it's only brought him JUST under the 15 degree limit and that he's always teetering between, say, 13 and 17 degrees. It's possible; their is the first time he's been cited with the new 15-degree limit in mind.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Presumably the 12 months is because given weeks or a few months worth of coaching (albeit this training could be spread out thinly over years) to adapt their action they couldn't manage it, so with 12 months the coaches can completely focus on correcting these problems without trying to do a patch-up job because they're needed in a match next month. Of course if they're not genuine bad bowling habits, just something they do intentionally then the 12 months works as punishment.

 

[BoyBrumby]

Noone in this thread has said he shouldn't bear some consequences of his dubious action. You're missing the point. It's the blanket 12 month 'punishment' which is the problem.

And I also don't see how on one hand you can claim in your first paragraph there's probably no malice in what he's done and then use the word 'ricidivist', a word almost exclusively used colloquially in describing a criminal.


Exactly; why do it at all? Maybe he can't help it? Maybe the last couple of times he's had his action worked-on, it's only brought him JUST under the 15 degree limit and that he's always teetering between, say, 13 and 17 degrees. It's possible; their is the first time he's been cited with the new 15-degree limit in mind.

Possibly in your circles, but "recidivist" just means one who relapses into a previous (usually prescribed, as in this case) behaviour! Which fits Shabbir I'd say.

Any degree of tolerance is going to be largely arbitrary anyway in my opinion, I think 15 was decided on as that is the point at which it becomes apparent to the naked eye. I would say tho that Shabbir must have the same standard applied as everyone else. I don't necessarily agree on a 12 month ban, but in the current climate no umpire is going to call him for the very simple reason that no-one could differentiate between 14 & 16 degrees with the naked eye. He could be retested in, say, 3 months & if he's under the limit be allowed to bowl again.

As with the degree of tolerance the length of the ban is arbitrary, but in my opinion at least there has to be some threat of a sanction beyond mere "remedial" work. Otherwise it'll just be repeat trips over to WA until they're cleared in lab conditions only to go back to their old ways in a match.

 

[open365]

As a very keen cricketer myself,and one who has been accused of 'chucking' before(though i don't) i would say that accuracy is also imrpoved by not bowling with a normal action,not just pace.

The punishment of a blanket 12 month ban suggests that the ICC have tried to deal with Shabbir before but it hasn't worked so they're going to 'tech him a lesson'. It's like Shane Warne and the 8 month ban for drugs.

 

[Run like Inzy]

Shabbir has no doubt tried to correct his action he just can't do it consistently. Unlike fortunate or unfortunate bowlers such as Shoaib, Murali and Lee who suffer 'disabilities' in the form of hyper extension or whatever it is. Why would someone deliberately chuck if he had already been called. Shabbir knew he was under observation from the whole world and he is simply being penalised for something which is out of his control. It was stated in the reports that umpires found his action deteriorated in the Multan test after the 3rd day. This was could have been because of tiredness. I think until the ICC gets a clear cut way of defining chucking not some numerical value they should not be able to call bowlers until it is obvious to see they are doing it deliberately to gain some sort of advantage.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Shabbir has no doubt tried to correct his action he just can't do it consistently. Unlike fortunate or unfortunate bowlers such as Shoaib, Murali and Lee who suffer 'disabilities' in the form of hyper extension or whatever it is. Why would someone deliberately chuck if he had already been called. Shabbir knew he was under observation from the whole world and he is simply being penalised for something which is out of his control. It was stated in the reports that umpires found his action deteriorated in the Multan test after the 3rd day. This was could have been because of tiredness. I think until the ICC gets a clear cut way of defining chucking not some numerical value they should not be able to call bowlers until it is obvious to see they are doing it deliberately to gain some sort of advantage.

Intention is irrelevant, if they're chucking then they should not be playing. A line has to be drawn somewhere - 15 degrees is that line (tho I still think it should be proportional to arm speed)

 

[luckyeddie]

Intention is irrelevant, if they're chucking then they should not be playing. A line has to be drawn somewhere - 15 degrees is that line (tho I still think it should be proportional to arm speed)

100% agree with this statement - intent has nothing to do with throwing (equally, having a 'bent' arm throughout the delivery has nothing to do with throwing either, and hyper-extension is actually 'negative' throwing - if you think about the mechanics involved).

Shabbir has a horribly jerky action, and despite the remedial action or coaching undertaken in the past, it seems the basic flaw remains and comes out in 'pressure situations'. That's so difficult to correct in test conditions, and I would suggest that in the next 12 months, he has an awful lot of work to do.

The next time he is reported, that's it - career down the toilet.